4 ms·
This is generally not true. What it generally boils down to with government contracts is a really sweet dog and pony show from the RFP process. Generally peop
by gregd 13y ago
This is generally not true. What it generally boils down to with government contracts is a really sweet dog and pony show from the RFP process. Generally people lack the critical thinking skills necessary to determine if a company can really fill their needs. They don't know the difference between a COTS system and one built from the ground up. They don't know the difference between a hosted solution and one running on their own servers.
I would say very rarely does it come down to simply being the lowest bidder or nepotism.
- hga 13y agoSometimes it does, due to the (near) total ignorance of what this is all about. 10 years ago I was briefly employed by a contractor for a state government that was working on a system a bit like this, although not hardly so life critical. The original system had been written and customized by the one of the big names like Lockheed or CSC and was pretty good as these things go ... but the state put continued maintenance out for bid and gave it to another company. With no transition, and really counterproductive budgeting. I.e. around a year previously another guy was hired to do what I did, and let go after a month or two because of money. What was I hired to do? The most difficult job of software archaeology I've ever attempted, not counting one code base that was impossible (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6092960 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6092960). The original programmers, probably on site, used SCCS (!) ... until they stopped some months before producing the binaries running on the system. Other minor details: the system ran on DEC Alpha hardware and their version of UNIX(TM), and of course by then it was a doomed system with no migration path for binaries. The state budgeted the project and made its milestones based on estimates made by another consulting company, and those were not based on reality. I bailed when it became clear there was no possible way to meet the state's demands, e.g. a point when I realized that if there was a way to recreate the production binaries I wasn't going to be able to find it, and they were assuming the sources were in a lot better shape.
- lostlogin 13y agoJust to throw in a situation I'm in at the moment. A public hospital has put out a tender for a new MRI scanner. I know who is likely cheapest (GE) and I know who is likely the most expensive (Siemens). I suspect Philips falls nearer the higher end, but will be in between. I have nothing to do with the purchase but work with those who do. I'd bet everything I own that GE don't win as the corners cut and unreliability are not winning any favours. Their scanner ticks all the boxes, but in the worst possible way. Multi-transmit RF? Yes! (But it doesn't work). Wide bore? Yes! (But you can't scan any further laterally than with a narrow bore). Propeller type imaging? Yes! (But scanner crashes, weird artifacts arise or the utterly crap interface gets in the way). The list goes on for probably another 50 points. Philips and Siemens have faults, sure. But they are more the result of compromises and are stylistic where the system is that way because someone chose to make it like that. Not because someone screwed up, forgot, didn't check, didn't know etc. some places chose quality over price, and this publicly owned MRI scanner will be in this category.